| Author |
Topic |
|
tfountain
Constraint Violating Yak Guru
491 Posts |
 Posted - 2007-12-06 : 16:06:32
|
| I would like to validate my thoughts on available options for failover. Currently our organization has an active / passive cluster with 2 servers. We came from SQL 2000 when this was first setup and now we are on 2005. My understanding is 2005 has a new method of failover referred to as data mirroring that is an active / passive setup as well. Contrast this to an Oracle RAC configuration where all the servers in the RAC are active. What does SQL Server have to match this? If no options now, is there anything coming down the road, perhaps in 2008? |
|
|
rmiao
Master Smack Fu Yak Hacker
7266 Posts |
Posted - 2007-12-06 : 22:39:44
|
| Not even in sql2k8. |
 |
|
|
Haywood
Posting Yak Master
221 Posts |
Posted - 2007-12-07 : 10:30:35
|
| MSCS is a high availability solution, not a scale-out one such as RAC. MS does support a solution called "Scaleable Shared Databases" but it's a read-only type of operation and geared for reporting or DSS operations.You can use mirroring and database snapshots of the mirror to extend out your architecture for reporting or other operations that you don't want to risk impacting the production database. |
|
|
|
tfountain
Constraint Violating Yak Guru
491 Posts |
Posted - 2007-12-07 : 13:15:20
|
| Thanks for the response. I do have a couple of follow up questions and clarifications.To summarize, there are currently two high-availability options available for SQL Server 2005 - (a) MSCS and (b) Data Mirroring. There are currently no known options being added to SQL Server 2008. Is this correct?The only option for a scale-out architecture in SQL Server 2005 is the Scaleable Shared Databases but that is for read-only access. Correct? This isn't relevant to my current inquiry, however this may prove useful in some reporting projects we are working on.Does anyone here have any experience with HPC (High-performance computing clustering)? I realize this doesn't provide the exact type of scale out that RAC does, but if this can be used in conjunction with MSCS then that theoritically solves that issue (at least in my mind). How reliable is this? Does it work? |
|
|
|
Haywood
Posting Yak Master
221 Posts |
Posted - 2007-12-07 : 13:30:05
|
quote:
Originally posted by tfountain
Thanks for the response. I do have a couple of follow up questions and clarifications.To summarize, there are currently two high-availability options available for SQL Server 2005 - (a) MSCS and (b) Data Mirroring. There are currently no known options being added to SQL Server 2008. Is this correct?The only option for a scale-out architecture in SQL Server 2005 is the Scaleable Shared Databases but that is for read-only access. Correct? This isn't relevant to my current inquiry, however this may prove useful in some reporting projects we are working on.
Re: 2008 - I don't know of any new additions to it to enable RAC type of operatons.There are things such as Distributed Partitioned Views and Linked Servers that you can use to sort-of scale out, but things get pretty complex pretty quickly and from what I've seen/experienced, most architect for scale up vs. scale out when it comes to MSSQL.quote:
Does anyone here have any experience with HPC (High-performance computing clustering)? I realize this doesn't provide the exact type of scale out that RAC does, but if this can be used in conjunction with MSCS then that theoritically solves that issue (at least in my mind). How reliable is this? Does it work?
Check out the HP Superdomes. You can build some massive scale-up (and again, sorta scale-out) solutions with them. |
|
|
|
tfountain
Constraint Violating Yak Guru
491 Posts |
Posted - 2007-12-07 : 14:31:32
|
| Hmmm, interesting information I'm finding. At face value it appears that MS is really steering away from a scale-out approach and supporting a scale-up approach via hardware that would lay on top of something like MSCS. Personally, I like the scale-up / high-availability combination. That's less of an administrative overhead (software, etc).And the Superdomes / Integrity servers look like a very attractive HPC option. |
|
|
|
tfountain
Constraint Violating Yak Guru
491 Posts |
|
|
tkizer
Almighty SQL Goddess
38200 Posts |
Posted - 2007-12-07 : 17:01:30
|
| Yes. We have 2-node clusters and 4-node clusters. All are running SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition, some are 64-bit, and all are active/active(/active/active).Tara KizerMicrosoft MVP for Windows Server System - SQL Serverhttp://weblogs.sqlteam.com/tarad/ |
|
|
|
tfountain
Constraint Violating Yak Guru
491 Posts |
Posted - 2007-12-07 : 17:05:10
|
| The way I understand it is with standard you are limited to 2 active (2 total computers) and with Enterprise you can have more (but I'm not sure yet but it seems like it's much more). Can you clarify? |
|
|
|
tkizer
Almighty SQL Goddess
38200 Posts |
Posted - 2007-12-07 : 17:13:06
|
| I don't have this stuff memorized, so I'd suggest checking the MS site for the differences between the editions.Tara KizerMicrosoft MVP for Windows Server System - SQL Serverhttp://weblogs.sqlteam.com/tarad/ |
|
|
|
rmiao
Master Smack Fu Yak Hacker
7266 Posts |
Posted - 2007-12-07 : 23:50:49
|
| Number of cluster node supported by sql2k5 enterprise edition depends on os version and edition. |
|
|
|
jordanam
Yak Posting Veteran
62 Posts |
|
|
rmiao
Master Smack Fu Yak Hacker
7266 Posts |
Posted - 2007-12-17 : 13:20:37
|
| Impossible if you are talking about OS. |
|
|
|
|
Options for availability